Jump to content

Requiem

Testers
  • Content Count

    1107
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1632 Excellent

About Requiem

  • Rank
    Founder

Contact Methods

  • MSN
    https://discord.gg/rPQCjch
  • Website URL
    http://www.youtube.com/requiembos

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    USA

Recent Profile Visitors

4242 profile views
  1. This is merely a guess...but if you look outside of the cockpit and down a little on the right side there is a placard for 24V so I would assume there's a plugin for external power in that square spot.
  2. Once I see tracers I know the general area someone is and if I spot them I'll usually have to remain "padlocked" on them. If I look away to check six or a wingman it is weirdly difficult to get tally back. I'm not doubting the effectiveness of camoflage and I know people conceal themselves in snow or other terrain incredibly well. Those people hiding in a field are not moving though. An airplane is a moving object and it's movement which attracts our eyes when scanning, so with that mind it will be more difficult to spot an airplane whose movement relative to you is small (think directly head on or astern here) but it gets much easier the more perpendicular to your flightpath the bandit becomes because relative movement increases. I still would expect airplanes to fly past without seeing each other as no one spots every airplane in RL even with TCAS or ATC giving you the direction where to look. However, when considering that Il-2 has perfect environmental visibility (ie - sky is clear with no haze) then the likelihood of spotting aircraft is not representative of RL in my experience. Hopefully one day we can see improvements. There are plenty of RL pilots who fly Il-2 who the devs can call on if they desire input on the subject.
  3. I haven't been on there for a while but I do remember the alt vis being on so maybe it switched back since then
  4. If adjusting scaling, rendering, and contrast allows us to spot contacts without needing to zoom in everywhere or relying on bullet tracers to spot airplanes first then I'm all for that. Usually it's tracers that are a giveaway...tracers are like moths to a flame. Imagine if none of the airplanes in the sim had tracer loadouts and how that would affect your likelihood of finding enemy aircraft in some MP situations. The alternate visilibility is the nice thing about jumping into Berloga...yes, the contacts render too far away under alternate visilibility currently, but you can actually fly around and search using a regular scan technique at a normal field of view and see things. There's no need to zoom. Just look around. It's just unfortunate at the moment the scaling is off when using it as there is good potential there if it could be done right. If I could wave a magic wand to fix visibility in Il-2...we would be able to easily see fighter sized contacts to 5nm (9km), but then with increasing difficulty out to a max of 7nm (13km) depending on the planform (worst case is front or rear aspect, best case would be in a turn showing off the full wing). That's just for airplanes with wingspans of like 30ft. Get into aircraft with larger wingspans and they would be seen even further away no worries. If we truly want to reflect what spotting is like in RL then compromises need to be made to account for the fact we're playing a game on screens. Otherwise if we just believe that using data without accounting for computer hardware limitations is realistic then we'll have to be satisfied with flying around in our little 0.5nm-1nm bubble (1-2km) hoping we don't get bounced after methodically checking our six o'clock a few seconds earlier. I'm not saying I can't see airplanes further out in-game, because I can, but it's just so much more difficult in-game than it is in RL to spot something initially let alone being able to maintain that tally or regain it quickly after looking away. It can be frustrating when people fly around for 40 mins seeing essentially nothing, but then looking at Tacview or a track later and seeing how many airplanes there were buzzing around close by and yet none of them saw each other. It feels like the visibility issue take away the "combat" portion of things at times.
  5. Here are both videos on how to attack bombers if you haven't caught them. Cheers.
  6. After speaking with the app maker about these differences he's found a small error he needs to fix that would explain the difference, so thank you for sharing your results with the P-38. I spent a few hours yesterday getting performance numbers for eight airplanes to input into my EM diagrams which are now going into the bin...so while I'll have to redo them in a new version of the app at least I didn't do every airplane without knowing about the error. The 1.2 degree difference wasn't between our tests or any of my sustained turn tests, but the difference between what Tacview showed and the app showed during a quick test where I recorded a flight maintaining 10°/sec.
  7. I've been doing some testing of various airplanes recently, so I did the P-38 this morning and found max sustained turn rates in level turns of: 200 mph, clean - 17.8°/sec 190 mph, Maneuver flaps - 19.1°/sec 180 mph, Full flaps - 20.3°/sec For comparison vs the K-4 with DB engine (the DC engine is rare enough that it's not a priority to test for me): 300 km/hr (186mph) clean - 19.1°/sec For the G-14: 280 km/hr (186mph) clean - 20.2°/sec My tests aren't done with Tacview though. They're done with an app that uses the telemetry output from Il-2 while flying and when I did a quick check between the app and recording Tacview, Tacview showed an extra 1.2 degrees of turn rate compared to the app at the exact same time when I held the turn rate constant in the P-38. There's always some error with this stuff so unless we get pure data from the devs there will be some small differences between tests. I'm not an advocate of using full flaps in any airplane unless you're desperate and are in a 1C fight or something. Maybe there isn't enough drag modeled when using full flaps.
  8. If you can wait that will be fine for now as the new method uses an app for real time data which saves a TON of effort. The only place I've shared some of the numbers I have are on my Patreon atm as it's all WIP and subject to change as I refine the testing process (the pictures in the first post here are out of date). When the time comes for more widespread testing I'll make another thread, but that won't happen before I complete my next video on EM theory.
  9. Hi Chris, there's no data in there because I guess no one wanted to help so I just let this thread die. It's ok though as I have a much more efficient way to test external to Il-2 now. When I publish my next video on EM theory maybe there will be more interest in conducting testing, but for now though just sit tight. I'll have a look at your Tempest times when I get a chance and compare it to mine. I use my keyboard to flight test because it's much more accurate. Currently I've done the P51, MkIX, Tempest, K4, and F4.
  10. Alt-F1 should allow you to look around yourself in the track but you're limited to only looking left, right, up, and down. You can't use all 6 degrees of freedom. Also keep in mind that if you did any kind of moment forward-back, up-down, or side-side that movement will still be replayed. If you want an example track people can look around in you should do a flight with VR or trackIR but turn the X Y Z axes off. The other option is to use the "edit" function on a track which will re-record head movements everytime the track is played but at least the viewer can do what they want that way.
  11. Aircraft ID is on my "to do" list as I was taught an easy technique to identify airplanes with the acronym WETFUS years and years ago (Wings, Engine, Tail, Fuselage, Undercarriage, Special Features). Like everything though I wish I had more than 24hrs in a day. It may not come out next week or the next but it will at some point.
  12. I'm an Aussie but I live in Texas and didn't get involved in online flight simming until I moved to the US, so I don't really fly with any Aussie squadrons due to the timezone shift.
  13. The best part about the U-2 is you have can someone sit in the back and give you pointers, but that doesn't always work out perfectly with only one set of controls 😆
×
×
  • Create New...